NYT > Most E-mailed Articles
NYT > Media and Advertising
Tip Jar
Help Me Evolve
Gay Animals Extremely Common in the Wild
From the Times Online UK
It is not what you would expect to see when you take your children on a Sunday outing to the natural history museum: a giant photograph of one male giraffe humping another, or two whales sparring with giant penises. This, however, is Norway, where — for better or worse — the normal rules do not apply. Three years ago the Government told the country’s museums and libraries that they should do more to contribute to social debates and dare to tackle taboo subjects.
The results of that order are now coming through. One museum is staging an exhibition that debunks the national myth that every Norwegian was an heroic Resistance fighter in the Second World War. A second is planning an exhibition on Vidkun Quisling, the ultimate Norwegian collaborator. A third has an exhibition showing how badly Norway has treated Gypsies.
But the Natural History Museum in Oslo has gone one better. As America’s religious right fulminates against homosexuality, Europe embraces gay marriage, and leading homosexuals such as Martina Navratilova denounce scientists in Oregon for attempting to make gay sheep straight, the Naturhistorisk Museum is stepping squarely into the heart of a controversy that dates back to at least AD1120 when the Church Council of Nablus described homosexuality as a “sin against nature” .
It is staging a government-financed exhibition in its august halls that shows that homosexuality — far from being unnatural — is actually rampant in the animal world. Against Nature? is the first exhibition in the world dedicated to gay animals, claims Petter Bockman, its bearded and ponytailed scientific adviser, who also happens to be the University of Oslo’s leading — and only — frog expert (there are not many amphibians, gay or straight, this far north).
The facts have been staring scientists in the face for years, Bockman says, as he stands in front of the gay giraffes. “It’s fairly easy to see because the giraffe’s sex organs are not what you’d call modest.” The problem, he contends, is that when researchers are confronted by such behaviour, they choose to ignore it. They claim it is irrelevant to their work, or fear ridicule or the loss of their grants if they draw attention to it. They prefer to describe two animals of the same sex frolicking with each other as “competition, a form of greeting, ritualised combat, things like that — even when we are talking full anal intercourse with ejaculation”.
The taboo was finally broken in 1999 when Bruce Bagemihl, a gay biologist at the University of Wisconsin, published a book entitled Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity.
Bagemihl had scoured every scientific journal and paper he could lay his hands on for references to homosexuality in animals. Tucked away at the end of long and erudite texts, or consigned to footnotes and appendices, he found that homosexuality had been observed in no fewer than 1,500 species, and well documented in 500 of them. The earliest mention of animal homosexuality probably came 2,300 years ago when Aristotle described two female hyenas cavorting with each other.
Bagemihl’s book provided the inspiration for this exhibition,
and any notion that homosexuality is a uniquely human trait is quickly
disposed of. You are greeted by a pair of swans — the very symbols of
romantic love — who turn out to be a female couple. “Up to a fifth of
all pairs are all male or all female,” reads the accompanying text. >> more at the times online uk
========
Below is a comment from John Warton, Reading, UK that I thought was worth including:
The point of this exhibition was not to justify
homosexuality in humans - I don't see that it needs to be justified -
but to respond to the claims of religious people that God instilled a
"natural law" (see Thomas Aquinas), or inclinitation away from
homosexuality which is transgressed in humans who "choose" to be gay.
The idea therein is that only humans could trangress because (according
to the religious) only humans have the power to disobey God (that is,
to sin); thus anything which "animals" do cannot be sinful.
This exhibition merely takes that argument to its logical conclusion:
if animal behaviour includes homosexuality (which it patently does),
then homosexuality cannot be sinful. Brockman cannot be blamed if the
homophobic cannot accept. What actually requires justification is not
homosexuality, but hatred.
THE GODFIGHT PROJECT : You Tube video debate competition on the existence of God
The debate between science, religion and politics is raging.
Atheists and Anarchists, Christians and Jews, Lawyers and Lovers,
Doctors and Deviants, Preachers and Politicians. This project is a
showcase of viewpoints, opinions. And convictions. Remember those?
Upload your two minute video that answers the question: Is there a God? - Why do you believe what you believe?
After you
upload, see what others have to say and comment/rate their videos.
Who'll win out? TKO for the big G? Will science sucker punch spirituality? Help shape the debate.
We are the Aliens - Mysterious Red Rain Suggests Humans Evolved from Another Planet
All those die hard evangelicals swear up and down that we didn't evolve from apes despite hundreds of studies worldwide that prove the exact opposite. They say that humans were created in the form of God, and God is certainly no monkey. Fine, how about an alien?
The point is we don't just know how long we've been evolving but we should keep our minds open to the data that science provides. Remember, if the evangelicals had it their way, Earth would still be at the center of the universe.
Based on new findings surrounding a mysterious red rain that fell in July of 2001 in southern India, some scientists believe microbes from space may have invaded our atmosphere. This raises the possibility that life does exist out there in the heavens. It also raises the intriguing possibility that if life first originated on another planet then it must mean all Earth organisms, including humans, evolved from alien life.
Locals believed that it foretold the end of the world, though the official explanation was that it was desert dust that had blown over from Arabia.
But one scientist in the area, Dr Godfrey Louis, was convinced there was something much more unusual going on.
Not only did Dr Louis discover that there were tiny biological cells present, but because they did not appear to contain DNA, the essential component of all life on Earth, he reasoned they must be alien lifeforms.
READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE FROM THE BBC
"This staggering claim is that this is possibly extraterrestrial. That is a big claim I know, but all the experiments are supporting this claim," said Dr Louis.
His remarkable work has set in motion a chain of events with scientists around the world debating the origin of these mysterious cells.
The main reason why Dr Louis's ideas have not been immediately laughed out of court is because they tie in with a theory promoted by two UK scientists ever since the 1960s.
The late Sir Fred Hoyle and Professor Chandra Wickramasinghe have been the champions of "Panspermia", the idea that life on Earth originated on another planet.
They speculate that life was first brought here on the back of a comet. Over the last decade, Panspermia is being taken ever more seriously.
The US space agency (Nasa) is now increasingly interested in searching for extra-terrestrial life.
A new robotic submarine is being developed to explore the oceans of one of Jupiter's moons. This submarine is on test at the moment in a lake in Texas.
Finding life elsewhere in the Solar System would be a vital bolster to the Panspermia theory.
Another section of Nasa is devoted to the study of bacteria found on Earth that can survive extreme conditions.
Finding these types of bacteria makes it more likely that micro-organism could survive the hardships of travelling through space on the back of a meteoroid.
Professor Wickramasinghe explained: "Bacteria have got to endure the extreme cold of space, the vacuum of space, ultraviolet radiation, cosmic rays, X-rays.
"That sounds like a tall order but bacteria do that. From what we know survival out in space is more or less ensured. Bacteria seem to me to be born space travellers."
Last summer, Horizon had exclusive access to a trip taken by Professor Wickramasinghe to India to investigate at first hand the red rain phenomenon.
He met Dr Louis and together they visited the people who had witnessed the red rain.
He was able to see the recent work of Dr Louis which shows that the red rain can replicate at 300C, an essential attribute of a space micro-organism that might have to endure extreme temperatures.
All this has convinced Professor Wickramasinghe that the red rain is a form of alien life.
"Before I came I had grave doubts as to whether the red rain was really an indication of life coming from space; new life coming from space," he said.
"But on reflection and after talking to Godfrey, I think I would now fairly firmly believe that it did represent an invasion of microbes from space."
Many scientists remain highly sceptical, however, but if Wickramasinghe and Louis are correct it will be the strongest evidence so far that the theory of Panspermia might be true.
Horizon - We Are The Aliens is broadcast on BBC Two on Tuesday 14 November at 2100 GMT
It's Time for a Godfight Threeway
The GODFIGHT has broken out past the DC beltway and smashed right through the mega-church Jesus jumbo-trons and into even the most intelligently designed labs. The mid-term elections have fueled the already growing trend of all things existential. People are debating the big life questions again and the media is all over it - and thats a good thing.
This level of coverage is what we need to educate the masses and remind them why there's a wall between church and state in the first place. In case you haven't noticed, it's been crumbling for a while - and that's a bad thing.
Religion controls through shared beliefs set forth in a central document (ie. bible, talmud, koran, etc.). Politics also controls through shared beliefs set forth in a central document (i.e. the constitution). Science seeks answers based on a shared academic approach known as the scientific process.
All three have celestial sized egos and all three use fear as a marketing tool to some degree.
Now of course, these three control freaks are battling it out and we've all got a lot riding on who wins. With them all undercutting each other, it'll be up to the Ameican people to choose the truth. Should we follow the appeals to our heart through religious guilt or follow the logic of science because guys in white coats usually know what they're talking about? Both Time and Newsweek do a good job of filling us in on the details as we prepare to place our bets tomorrow - Election Day, 2006.
GREAT READ ON HUFF POST TODAY BELOW
Interesting coincidence: Both Time and Newsweek take the religion tack in their pre-election issues with two stark (and actually quite aesthetically appealing) covers invoking the question of religious dominance in America today.
The hand of new Newsweek editor Jon Meacham is detectable in this week's big evangelical package (cue Ted Haggard joke here). Speaking of Haggard, It's interesting to note that the cover references three of the stories included in the six-part package including the cover headline "Sex vs. Social Justice: Evangelicals At The Crossroads", but fails to mention the Haggard, totally-relevant newspeg that he is, despite having a big piece on the story inside. As for Time, well, presenting "God" and "Science" as equal participants in a "debate" is confers a sort of troubling level of legitimacy on the whole "Intelligent Design" movement by implying that there are two sides of equal merit here. There are two schools of thought and two perspectives, but a religious belief system has nothing to do with scientific theories based on specific, quantifiable data.
Time does get points for acknowledging the imbroglio to come with "Election Day: Get Ready For The Glitches" which acknowledges how woefully unprepared the states are for an election day that they knew was coming and had plenty of time to prepare for. For urgency, national importance and election-day relevance, we wish that this had been Time's cover choice.
GODFIGHT :: Hear Dawkins on the Ropes
David Quinn, a well known Catholic commentator and journalist in Ireland debated Richard Dawkins on Irish radio last week on the reasonableness of religious belief. Dawkins is a formidable debater, but David Quinn absolutely embarrassed him – he had Dawkins on the ropes from the outset. It is a rare moment when Dawkins is left speechless and is well worth listening to.
The debate can be downloaded by going here.... The debate starts at 7min 57 seconds into the programme and lasts for about 18 minutes.
Fishin' Gone
A sad state of affairs from the NEW YORK TIMES
"If fishing around the world continues at its present pace, more and more species will vanish, marine ecosystems will unravel and there will be “global collapse” of all species currently fished, possibly as soon as midcentury, fisheries experts and ecologists are predicting."
Recent Posts
- Bringing Big Wheels Back
- Monkey See, Monkey Do...Good
- Consumer Trend Watch : Here come the "TRYSUMERS"
- Enter, The Human Camera
- Parrot Vocabulary Leaves Scientists Speechless
- Top Consumer Trends for 2007 from Trendwatching.com
- Gay Animals Extremely Common in the Wild
- 85 years in 40 seconds
- THE GODFIGHT PROJECT : You Tube video debate competition on the existence of God
- World's Tallest Man Saves Two Dolphins
